They say that Aadhaar would allow authorities to create a full profile of a person's spending habits, phone records, banking records, rail bookings, property ownership and a trove of other information.
The judgment has also struck down Sections 33 (2), 47 and 57 of the Act. Previously in January 2018, a five-judge bench of the apex court began a fresh hearing on the Aadhaar case which went on to become the second-longest running hearing in the history of the Supreme Court - spanning 38 working days and almost five months.
A group of private companies had earlier this year appealed to the apex court seeking continuity for Aadhaar - the country's citizen identity programme.
Section 57 which permitted private players such as banks, mobile companies to insist on Aadhaar struck down.
The Supreme Court is delivering verdicts in several key cases today. Also, the bill does not have a proviso on the absolute right to be forgotten, and this will raise issues about the already floating around Aadhaar data even when the bill is enacted. However, the linking of your Aadhaar number to bank accounts is not required anymore, and the same goes for linking it to SIM cards.
It added there had been minimal demographic and biometric data collected by UIDAI for Aadhaar enrolment. Along with this, the SC also said that all social schemes provided in schools can not be denied to any child on the basis of no Aadhaar.
Kavanaugh To Turn Over Calendars From 1982 To Judiciary Committee
He also reinterred his full support for Judge Kavanaugh who he described as a "fine man, with an impeccable reputation". Ford's legal team has said she strongly prefers that her allegations are fully investigated before she testifies.
Finally, the Supreme Court verdict also revokes mandated Aadhaar card submission to digital wallets. Justice AK Sikri observed that Aadhaar is meant to help government benefits to reach marginalised sections of society.
Making some starkly different observations from the other judges, Justice Chandrachud stated that it cannot be the institutional responsibility of UIDAI to protect the data of citizens.
The apex court's five-judge Constitution bench said Aadhaar was meant to be "unique" and it was better to be unique than being best.
Several Aadhaar-linked hunger deaths have been reported across India, including in Jharkhand's Simdega district where an 11-year-old girl died of starvation last year, months after her family's ration card, similar to welfare coupons in the U.S., was cancelled because they did not possess an Aadhaar number.
The top court said Aadhaar was serving much bigger public interest and Aadhaar. He said the attack on Aadhar by petitioners is based on violation of rights under the Constitution, will lead to a surveillance State.
"Judgement welcome to a certain extent since SC didn't impose a restriction in this regard and clearly said that centre or state governments can provide reservation if they want", says Mayawati on the Supreme Court refusing to refer the 2006 verdict in Nagraj case on reservation in promotion for SC/ST in government jobs to a larger bench. PAN-Aadhaar linking deadline is March 31, 2019.